Those were the vibes of late 2025. But nearly five months into 2026, it’s clear that generative AI, for better or worse, will be integrated into creators’ workflows and processes, and in some cases, their content.

Here we take a look at the current state of generative AI in the creator economy.

Platforms are cracking down on AI-generated content and adding tools to protect creators

Leaders from platforms like YouTube and Instagram are weighing in on how to properly identify AI-generated content and how the human touch of creators remains important. YouTube’s Neil Mohan promised earlier this year that the platform would “reduce the spread of low-quality AI content.” Online video editing platform Kapwing reports that just days after Mohan’s promise, 16 of the top 100 most subscribed slop channels have been permanently removed from the platform.

As The Hollywood Reporter reported, YouTube recently rolled out its AI deepfake detection tool across Hollywood. These tools ask celebrities to upload their likenesses and then flag content that may use it without their consent, such as AI-generated fan movies that recast characters or fake trailers for upcoming movies.

A YouTube spokesperson confirmed to Digiday that the tool is available to all creators in the YouTube Partner Program and has also been launched for politicians and journalists.

“Our goal is to build AI technology that responsibly powers human creativity, and that includes providing tools that help protect creators and their businesses,” they said.

Some creators are using AI to replace creative teams

From ChatGPT and Claude to Adobe Firefly, there are plenty of generation tools to help creators generate ideas and create content.

Last February, RHEI announced its AI platform Made as another option for creators seeking creative support through AI agents. RHEI founder and CEO Shahrzad Rafati calls the program a “creative operating system.”

Lafferty said Made gives subscribers access to a handful of AI agents (the more you pay, the more you get), including creative director Milo, producer Remy, community manager Zara, and distributor Lila, all of which are personalized to the creator’s DNA.

Rafferty said RHEI was initially used as a proof of concept for enterprise accounts (Sony Pictures, Lionsgate, Universal Pictures) before opening it up to creators. RHEI did not provide details, but said it has had “incredible success” with enterprise clients and is one of the largest companies helping businesses launch digital channels, fill content and drive customer engagement.

She believes that 90% of content will be generated by AI or by humans with the help of AI in the next year or so, and that tools like Made are meant to “free up creators to focus on being better content creators.”

RHEI declined to say how many creators are using the program, saying only that it is “several thousand.”

Creators use AI to filter out future partnerships

Creator “super app” POP.STORE recently launched its AI ECHO ME program, an agent commerce platform aimed at helping creators identify revenue opportunities, generate content, and engage with fans.

CEO Gautam Goswani told Digiday that the tool is intended to replace some of the disparate agent tools creators may be using, and can connect to social media accounts, review DMs, and ultimately verify emails and identify whether a message is coming from a brand or a creator. This identifies the size of the message and whether it has an explicit financial purpose.

“Creators are basically chickens with their heads cut off, running around all day long, trying to come up with creative ideas and filming great content in all that madness, but always worrying that they’re going to get lost in the algorithm,” Goswani claimed creators told him. “80% of DMs go unanswered.”

In his view, what separates top creators from others is the strength of their teams. Goswani suggests that ECHO ME be that team. Especially since this tool allows you to send messages as the author (more on that later), act as a sales agent, monitor comments and likes on social media, rank your followers, and even send offers from POP.STORE to users who are most likely to convert.

It’s expensive (DM monitoring and around 500 AI responses cost $50 per month, and higher tiers allow for more responses; this format is similar to generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude).

15,000 creators signed up across lifestyle, fitness, real estate, and food categories ahead of the official launch on March 18th. According to a spokesperson, approximately 20,000 creators are using ECHO ME as of April 30th.

Some are using generative AI to talk to fans

Business content creator Konstantinos Sinodinos told Digiday that he was initially hesitant to start using ECHO ME’s chat feature. “Your voice is a very personal asset and very difficult to reproduce,” he said. “But once I realized how accurately it represented me, it started to feel less like an AI and more like an extension of me.”

Sinodinos told Digiday that he can now have thousands of parallel discussions on Instagram, significantly increasing his engagement with his followers. It’s unclear if they realize he’s using generative AI for chat.

In any case, he is adamant that other creators use tools like this. If you’re serious about scaling. “We’re entering a phase where the winning creator not only gets the most views, but also the best system,” Sinodinos said. “The combination of personal branding, owned audiences, and AI provides new and unfair advantages.”

Brands may start using AI influencers to reduce risk

In an era where collaborations can end overnight due to morality clauses being triggered, some believe that AI-generated influencers could offer brands risk-free partnership opportunities, or at least ones with more control. At least that’s what Ksenia Petrina, co-founder and CEO of influencer marketing company Holy Marketing, believes. It was done happen.

Petrina told Digiday that while there is some curiosity among brands about AI-generated influencers and some are experimenting with them as a test, there is no real evidence that they outperform human creators in campaigns.

And then there’s the issue of trust. “Brand safety and audience trust are different issues. Brands may feel safer using AI creators because there’s less risk of the creator saying something offensive or going off-message. But that doesn’t automatically mean the audience will trust them,” she said.

And the biggest risk is turning potential customers away because they feel betrayed by your synthetic persona.

“Creator marketing works because the audience believes that real people are making real decisions,” Petrina says.

Rather than relying on AI influencers as a means of control, Petrina believes brands should build human-centered creator systems that they own and use AI to support the process through “research, scripting, trend analysis, reporting, and production support.”

But who owns them?

AI-generated influencers may avoid embarrassing scandals and gaffes, but it remains unclear who owns those rights. Victoria Schwartz, a professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law and an intellectual property expert, told Digiday that this is a legally murky area.

“Typically, if you take an image of a real influencer and reproduce it, they may have publicity rights,” Schwartz said. “They might say, ‘Stop using mine.’ […] But what if the image you’re looking at isn’t a real person’s face?”

Schwartz wrote a paper that analyzed publicity rights by state and highlighted which states can claim publicity rights even for influencers created by AI. But as it turns out, the situation is too uncertain.

“They didn’t really think about this,” Schwartz said of those creating AI influencers. “None of this has been litigated…There are a lot of troubling questions.”

This could pose potential problems in the future, especially as more brands rely on AI influencers to promote their products.

While AI has benefits for creators, it still carries risks

Despite the claimed workflow and scalability benefits, it is clear that there are still risks and kinks to the creator economy adopting generative AI at scale.

Take mega-creator Kirby Lame, for example, who in January struck a deal with a Hong Kong-based printing company to acquire the rights to his AI-generated “twin,” said to be worth $975 million. While the deal seemed like a huge win for the TikTok star, things are looking increasingly uncertain, according to reports from The Wrap and others.

The printing company’s stock price has plunged 90% since the transaction, major brokerages have restricted trading in the company, and Lame has removed the stock ticker from his social media bio, according to The Wrap.

And, as the New York Times reported, there’s also an army of AI-generated influencers that may be influencing American politics. The more articles that show how AI-generated influencers are being used to manipulate people, the less the general public will trust AI.

And of course, one of the biggest questions facing creators using generative AI is how it can reflect the creator’s preferences, or lack thereof. Creators, marketers, and technology leaders who believe that generative AI should be a part of workflows all emphasize that generative AI does not replace humanity or individual preference, and when it is used. instead of Creativity, that’s obvious.

“There are categories that are instantly recognizable: eerie lighting, conventional compositions, lack of real perspective. There’s no intention there. The audience feels it even if they can’t name it,” said Octavio Maron, Dentsu’s chief creative partner for creative innovation.

“But when AI is serving true creative vision – when sense, judgment and human perspective are driving decisions – it becomes invisible. The work just lands. So the question isn’t really whether the AI ​​content is detectable; it’s whether there’s someone behind it worth listening to.”